Fred Osterman's 3rd Ed. of "Shortwave Receivers Past & Present" rates
the R-4C as five stars new and four stars used. He also calls it, "An
outstanding amateur receiver."

In article .com,
"RHF" wrote:

TM,
.
Many people would not think twice about spending
$1000 to $2500 every 3-5 of years for a 'new' Computer.
.
But how many of us in the Shortwave Listening Hobby
would make the BUY Decision that easily for a 'new'
$1000 to $2500 Radio/Receiver every 3-5 of years ? ? ?
.
it's about perceived value = time-of-use and enjoyment ~ RHF


I have spent more that that.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon - Alas the 'exception' that proves the rule ~ RHF

Jim wrote:

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 21:08:06 -0500, dxAce
wrote:

Go tote it!

Tote what, 'tard boy? Your brain? That's easy - if I can find
something small enough to put it in.

You just keep taking your meds... it'll be all right.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Jim wrote:

On 15 Mar 2005 12:34:52 -0800, wrote:



Yeah it's sad, but we all saw this coming. I have an R8, but I
hardly ever use it. I like the S800 much better, or I just use the
internet.

Jim

If you like your S800 better than your R8, the latter is in desperate
need of repair. You can find the address of Drake's service department
on their website.

Why? The S800 has a *much* better sync than the R8. Remember, I
have an original R8, not an R8B. The R8's sync is double sideband
only, not selectable sideband like the R8B and S800. Plus the S800
has better sound and is easier to use.

If you think an R8 (not an R8B!) is better than an S800, then your
S800 is in desperate need of repair!

My former neighbour has an S800... had them both here, side by side. The R8 was
clearly the superior receiver, and the 'sync' had nothing to do with it.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Drake R7, R8 and R8B.

Sync detection is important, but it's not everything. The S800 has
great sound, and yes, it has good sync detection (though there are
other (recently discontinued) 'portables' with better). It's a good
portable receiver housed in a grossly oversized plastic body. It will
always deliver portable performance because that's what it was designed
for. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's not reasonable to expect
the S800 to equal an R8 in overall performance. Or look at it this way:
If the S800 even came close to the R8 in overall performance, the R8
would really have to suck....which it doesn't.

Sometimes I have the feeling that we're not "allowed" to subject the
S800 to the same kind of critical scrutiny that we routinely subject
other receivers to, and I don't understand that. (I'm not saying that
this is Jim's attitude, but it's an attitude I encounter periodically
here and elsewhere.) The 800 is a good receiver. It can withstand the
scrutiny well enough. We don't have to pretend that the S800 is the
best receiver ever made! It's great to be 'loyal' to a particular make
or model, but jeez...at some point we have to get a grip!

Steve

Try responding to the question with an answer rather than dodging with
another question. Again:

Really...now that is a statement sounds like it is making a point when
it really isn't. Please tell me what you are really saying. Surely
you can't be saying that China will only change when the CCP has
completely disappeared. Surely all the change that I have read about
for the past 20+ years isn't a figment of some reporter's imagination
is it?

Are you saying that the only change that will occur in China will
happen after the CCP has completely disappeared? If so, how do you
account for all of the change that has been reported in the last 20
plus years.

Or are you just trying to make a coy political statement without
backing it up.....



Li Changchun wrote:
Have you lived there? Or are you just a couch political anal-ist?

wrote in message
oups.com...
Really...now that is a statement sounds like it is making a point
when
it really isn't. Please tell me what you are really saying.
Surely
you can't be saying that China will only change when the CCP has
completely disappeared. Surely all the change that I have read
about
for the past 20+ years isn't a figment of some reporter's
imagination
is it?


Li Changchun wrote:
wrote
I'm not sure shortwave will prove to be a viable
alternative to the net in China. The governmental net controls
are
far
from perfect right now. I see a gradual loosening of controls
on
society in general and the net in particular as China becomes
more
secure in it's position as a major economic and political
player.

The only thing that will "loosen" anything in China is when the
CCP
is hung
up on the rafters.

"mike0219116" wrote in message
oups.com...
Fred Osterman's 3rd Ed. of "Shortwave Receivers Past & Present"
rates
the R-4C as five stars new and four stars used. He also calls it,
"An
outstanding amateur receiver."

Yeah, it seems to be a good amateur receiver, but a
general coverage shortwave receiver it ain't.

--Mike L.

Michael Lawson wrote:

"mike0219116" wrote in message
oups.com...
Fred Osterman's 3rd Ed. of "Shortwave Receivers Past & Present"
rates
the R-4C as five stars new and four stars used. He also calls it,
"An
outstanding amateur receiver."

Yeah, it seems to be a good amateur receiver, but a
general coverage shortwave receiver it ain't.

The R-4B with a bunch of extra crystals or coupled with the FS-4 synthesizer was
much better for SW dx'ing.

The R-4C was indeed (and may still be) a better ham radio receiver.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

In article ,
dxAce wrote:


Michael Lawson wrote:


The R-4B with a bunch of extra crystals or coupled with the FS-4 synthesizer was
much better for SW dx'ing.

The R-4C was indeed (and may still be) a better ham radio receiver.



Ok so the thread has changed, from Drake R-8 to R-4, speaking of
Drakes, I was wondering if the SPR-4 was better or worse reciever
than r-4? I never fooled with r-4, but have tried spr-4, my major complaint with that it it a little too selective and audio quality lacking.

Chuck